California lawmakers debate AB 8 addressing hemp product regulation and youth safety

The California Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee convened on July 7, 2025, to discuss Assembly Bill 8 (AB 8), which aims to regulate hemp-derived products more strictly. The meeting featured testimonies from various stakeholders, highlighting both support and opposition to the bill.

Amy Jenkins, representing the California Cannabis Operators Association, expressed strong support for AB 8, emphasizing the need to address the influx of highly intoxicating hemp products in the market. Jenkins noted alarming findings from a recent study, which revealed that 95% of tested hemp products contained prohibited synthetic cannabinoids, with some products having THC levels significantly exceeding legal limits. She argued that these products pose serious public health risks and undermine California's equity goals. Jenkins clarified that AB 8 would not cut funding for Proposition 64 programs but rather stabilize the tax base that supports them.

Ryan Sherman from the California Narcotics Officers Association also voiced support for the bill, citing public safety concerns. He pointed out that hemp-derived THC products have become widely available through loopholes in regulations, often containing higher THC levels than those sold in licensed dispensaries. Sherman highlighted that AB 8 would prohibit the sale of synthetic cannabis products, require out-of-state manufacturers to register, and enhance enforcement capabilities to protect public health and safety.

Several other organizations, including the Marin County Board of Supervisors and the California District Attorneys Association, expressed their support for AB 8 during the meeting.

However, opposition arose from Jim Keddy, executive director of Youth Forward, who raised concerns about a proposed tax cut for the cannabis industry included in the bill. Keddy warned that this cut could lead to a significant loss of revenue for essential youth programs and childcare services, particularly in light of existing federal funding challenges.

The discussions underscored the ongoing debate over balancing public health and safety with the economic implications of cannabis regulation in California. The committee's decision on AB 8 will have significant ramifications for the state's cannabis industry and public health initiatives.